Friday, September 29, 2006

Denial:

This article can be found on the web at

*http://www.thenation.com/doc/20061016/editors*

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iraq and Reality

[from the October 16, 2006 issue]

Reality can be inconvenient. It can get in the way when politicians are

busy with bamboozlement. George W. Bush and his comrades-in-spin have

for years pitched their Iraq misadventure as the central front in the

"war on terror." We must fight them /there/ to prevent them from

fighting us /here/, goes their grade-school-level argument, cooked up to

replace the WMD argument (which lost its utility in the absence of

WMDs). But the recent disclosure of a classified National Intelligence

Estimate, first reported by the /New York Times/, has undercut that

justification. The NIE, finished in April, noted that Bush's invasion of

Iraq and the subsequent--inept and brutal--occupation has led to a rise

in Islamic radicalism that has increased the threat posed by global

jihadists. "The Iraq conflict has become the 'cause celebre' for

jihadists," the NIE says, "breeding a deep resentment of US involvement

in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist

movement." To be blunt: Bush & Co. got it exactly wrong.

This is not, alas, very surprising. They have gotten everything about

Iraq wrong. And the tragedy is that they need not have. Before the war,

experts on terrorism and the Middle East raised the possibility (the

probability) that an invasion of Iraq would do more harm than good to

the Administration's effort to crush the murderous Al Qaeda and its

allies. It was hardly unforeseen that the invasion would sow suspicion

and anti-Americanism, which would be invaluable and exploitable for the

forces of bin Ladenism. In fact, before the invasion, as this magazine

argued--and as our colleague David Corn points out in his book /Hubris:

The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War/

(written with Michael Isikoff)--just about every problem and challenge

that has transpired in the wake of the invasion, from sectarian strife

to rampant violence and chaos, was predicted by policy experts within

the military, the State Department and the CIA. The Bush White House and

the civilian leaders of the Pentagon (Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz,

Douglas Feith) were uninterested in such reality-based policy work. They

ignored it because acknowledging such analysis would have been an

admission that they were about to engage in something other than a

cakewalk, a real drag on the sales campaign for the war.

So now one question is, Does this NIE, which notes that jihadists "are

increasing in both number and geographic dispersion," change anything?

An NIE is a consensus assessment of the intelligence agencies. The

report indicates that the government's best terrorism experts believe

the war is a factor in fueling the spread of jihadism. Experts can be

wrong; but such a judgment should have given Bush and his aides pause

and prompted a strategic review. The White House responded to the NIE

leak quickly--and predictably. It initially claimed the stories did not

convey the report's nuances. Only under pressure did it release excerpts

of the NIE, which indeed warns that the global jihadist movement is

spreading and that the war has contributed to this trend.

The White House declines to confront the implications of this

conclusion. There is a pattern here. Before the invasion, it refused to

see the holes in its case for war or the warnings of the chaos to come.

After the invasion, as Iraq slid toward civil war and bedlam, it

consistently declared that progress was being made. In September Bush

claimed he invaded Iraq because it was a "clear threat"--although it's

been demonstrated that Iraq had no unconventional weapons and no ties to

Al Qaeda. Throughout the Iraq endeavor, intelligence and analysis have

not mattered to Bush or his aides. The mission now is to keep

sidestepping such intrusions--all the way through election day.

Thursday, September 28, 2006

Gas Prices near election time:

*ZNet | Ecology*

*Reading the Gas Pump Numbers

What Do Falling Oil Prices Tell Us about War with Iran, the

Elections, and Peak-Oil Theory*

*by Michael T. Klare; TomDispatch ;

September 27, 2006*

What the hell is going on here? Just six weeks ago, gasoline

prices at the pump were hovering at the $3 per gallon mark;

today, they're inching down toward $2 -- and some analysts

predict even lower numbers before the November elections. The

sharp drop in gas prices has been good news for consumers, who

Wednesday, September 27, 2006

I realize that I'm a couple days late with this, a redacted copy of the NIE report. The important thing to remember is that this is the administration putting its "best foot forward"! Imagine what the whole thing tells us about the war in Iraq. Also, sorry about the formating -- the original was in pdf format.

Declassified Key Judgments of the National

Intelligence Estimate .Trends in Global Terrorism:

Implications for the United States. dated April 2006

Key Judgments

United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of

al-Qa’ida and disrupted its operations; however, we judge that al-Qa’ida will continue to

pose the greatest threat to the Homeland and US interests abroad by a single terrorist

organization. We also assess that the global jihadist movement—which includes al-

Qa’ida, affiliated and independent terrorist groups, and emerging networks and cells—is

spreading and adapting to counterterrorism efforts.

• Although we cannot measure the extent of the spread with precision, a large body

of all-source reporting indicates that activists identifying themselves as jihadists,

although a small percentage of Muslims, are increasing in both number and

geographic dispersion.

• If this trend continues, threats to US interests at home and abroad will become

more diverse, leading to increasing attacks worldwide.

• Greater pluralism and more responsive political systems in Muslim majority

nations would alleviate some of the grievances jihadists exploit. Over time, such

progress, together with sustained, multifaceted programs targeting the

vulnerabilities of the jihadist movement and continued pressure on al-Qa’ida,

could erode support for the jihadists.

We assess that the global jihadist movement is decentralized, lacks a coherent global

strategy, and is becoming more diffuse. New jihadist networks and cells, with anti-

American agendas, are increasingly likely to emerge. The confluence of shared purpose

and dispersed actors will make it harder to find and undermine jihadist groups.

• We assess that the operational threat from self-radicalized cells will grow in

importance to US counterterrorism efforts, particularly abroad but also in the

Homeland.

• The jihadists regard Europe as an important venue for attacking Western interests.

Extremist networks inside the extensive Muslim diasporas in Europe facilitate

recruitment and staging for urban attacks, as illustrated by the 2004 Madrid and

2005 London bombings.

We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and

operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the

struggle elsewhere.

• The Iraq conflict has become the .cause celebre. for jihadists, breeding a deep

resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for

the global jihadist movement. Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves,

and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry

on the fight.

We assess that the underlying factors fueling the spread of the movement outweigh its

vulnerabilities and are likely to do so for the duration of the timeframe of this Estimate.

• Four underlying factors are fueling the spread of the jihadist movement: (1)

Entrenched grievances, such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western

domination, leading to anger, humiliation, and a sense of powerlessness; (2) the

Iraq .jihad;. (3) the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social, and

political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and (4) pervasive anti-US

sentiment among most Muslims.all of which jihadists exploit.

Concomitant vulnerabilities in the jihadist movement have emerged that, if fully exposed

and exploited, could begin to slow the spread of the movement. They include

dependence on the continuation of Muslim-related conflicts, the limited appeal of the

jihadists. radical ideology, the emergence of respected voices of moderation, and

criticism of the violent tactics employed against mostly Muslim citizens.

• The jihadists. greatest vulnerability is that their ultimate political solution.an

ultra-conservative interpretation of shari.a-based governance spanning the

Muslim world.is unpopular with the vast majority of Muslims. Exposing the

religious and political straitjacket that is implied by the jihadists. propaganda

would help to divide them from the audiences they seek to persuade.

• Recent condemnations of violence and extremist religious interpretations by a few

notable Muslim clerics signal a trend that could facilitate the growth of a

constructive alternative to jihadist ideology: peaceful political activism. This also

could lead to the consistent and dynamic participation of broader Muslim

communities in rejecting violence, reducing the ability of radicals to capitalize on

passive community support. In this way, the Muslim mainstream emerges as the

most powerful weapon in the war on terror.

• Countering the spread of the jihadist movement will require coordinated

multilateral efforts that go well beyond operations to capture or kill terrorist

leaders.

If democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years,

political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and

groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives. Nonetheless,

attendant reforms and potentially destabilizing transitions will create new opportunities

for jihadists to exploit.

Al-Qa’ida, now merged with Abu Mus’ab al-Zarqawi’s network, is exploiting the

situation in Iraq to attract new recruits and donors and to maintain its leadership role.

• The loss of key leaders, particularly Usama Bin Ladin, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and

al-Zarqawi, in rapid succession, probably would cause the group to fracture into

smaller groups. Although like-minded individuals would endeavor to carry on the

mission, the loss of these key leaders would exacerbate strains and disagreements.

We assess that the resulting splinter groups would, at least for a time, pose a less

serious threat to US interests than does al-Qa.ida.

• Should al-Zarqawi continue to evade capture and scale back attacks against

Muslims, we assess he could broaden his popular appeal and present a global

threat.

• The increased role of Iraqis in managing the operations of al-Qa.ida in Iraq might

lead veteran foreign jihadists to focus their efforts on external operations.

Other affiliated Sunni extremist organizations, such as Jemaah Islamiya, Ansar al-

Sunnah, and several North African groups, unless countered, are likely to expand their

reach and become more capable of multiple and/or mass-casualty attacks outside their

traditional areas of operation.

• We assess that such groups pose less of a danger to the Homeland than does al-

Qa.ida but will pose varying degrees of threat to our allies and to US interests

abroad. The focus of their attacks is likely to ebb and flow between local regime

targets and regional or global ones.

We judge that most jihadist groups.both well-known and newly formed.will use

improvised explosive devices and suicide attacks focused primarily on soft targets to

implement their asymmetric warfare strategy, and that they will attempt to conduct

sustained terrorist attacks in urban environments. Fighters with experience in Iraq are a

potential source of leadership for jihadists pursuing these tactics.

• CBRN capabilities will continue to be sought by jihadist groups.

While Iran, and to a lesser extent Syria, remain the most active state sponsors of

terrorism, many other states will be unable to prevent territory or resources from being

exploited by terrorists.

Anti-US and anti-globalization sentiment is on the rise and fueling other radical

ideologies. This could prompt some leftist, nationalist, or separatist groups to adopt

terrorist methods to attack US interests. The radicalization process is occurring more

quickly, more widely, and more anonymously in the Internet age, raising the likelihood of

surprise attacks by unknown groups whose members and supporters may be difficult to

pinpoint.

• We judge that groups of all stripes will increasingly use the Internet to

communicate, propagandize, recruit, train, and obtain logistical and financial

support.